I feel that it should be illegal to keep hot reptiles. I believe that the only types of venomous snakes that should be legal to keep are venomoids.
As the law defines them by species and as there is no such word as venomoid it would therefor be illegal to keep a surgically altered snake that by legal deffinition venomous.
I feel that hot snakes are not only a risk to their owner, but to the general public
To my knowledge there has never been a record of a thrid party bite from an escaped venomous snake.
As to the owners they know full well what can occurr from a bite and the risk is theirs to take.
Duct/gland removal, when done properly and with proper anesthetics, does not alter the snakes quality of life. How can the absence of venom negatively effect a captive snake?
Verdict is still out on this subject and much more data is needed.
There are arguments that If the surgery is performed correctly it will never again be able of producing venom that is a BIG "IF " to risk you life on. It is not a guarantee it will never again have the capability to deliver venom.
Regarding venomoid surgery if the organ IS NOT fully removed it has the potential to regenerate or more accurately Restore itself to a partial use. We do have evidence of many cases of ductal regeneration in which the animal was capable of delivering venom through the duct again. However as of this time we have no direct evidence of the duvorneys gland regenerating. This however I strongly believe in time as the ductal refusing has we will see from the same principles duvorney's glands doing the same.
Just because something has not to some peoples views been credibly scientifically proven does not mean by and means it cannot happen. The evidence especially in the reptile and amphibian families show all to often exactly how much these animals can do to repair damage done to their bodies and or in reproduction.
For the record numerous medical research institutes including The United States Department of Agriculture have done numerous studies on Reparative Regeneration using reptiles as part of their experiments and have found that it can and does occur. This includes and is not limited to reptilian and amphibians.
Many of the studies indicate a degree of both organ and tissue regeneration.
Regeneration is defined as the replacement, repair or restoration of lost or damaged structures or reconstitution of the whole body from a small fragment of it during the post-embryonic life.
There are two main types:
Reparative Regeneration: This type is limited to the repair or healing of injuries, and it takes place by localized cell proliferation and migration. This is seen both in vertebrates and invertebrates.
Restorative Regeneration: It is the replacement of lost body parts. It is rare among vertebrates but common in invertebrates.
EXAMPLES OF REGENERATION ABILITY IN DIFFERENT ANIMALS
The degree of this ability differs in the various groups of animals. Following are some examples from invertebrates:
Protozoans: If an Amoeba is cut into parts each containing a piece of the nucleus, the parts grow into complete individuals.
Sponges: Any part of the body can be cut off or injured and it will be readily repaired, e.g., Sycon.
Coelenterates: A Hydra may be cut into many bits, and each part will regenerate into a complete individual of smaller size. The posterior end will regenerate the mouth and tentacles; the anterior part regenerates the foot and adhesive disc.
In vertebrates, the regenerative power is quite restricted. In fish, the tail does not regenerate. In reptiles it does.
Regenerative power is most spectacular in the urodele amphibians. In newts and salamanders, limbs, tails, external gills, upper and lower jaws, parts of the eye (iris, retina) can regenerate.
In mammals, regenerative ability is restricted to tissue regeneration i.e., the restoration of defects and lesions in various tissues but not the restoration of lost organs.
The only exception is the liver in mammals. If a part of it is removed, the remaining portion grows by repeated division to full size, but the normal shape is not restored. Likewise, if one kidney is removed, the other enlarges to take over the function of the missing kidney. This is called compensatory hypertrophy.
There are numerous studies to this end
Performing or ownership of an altered venomous reptile is not for the love of the animal. It is however human lust. Humanity has a tendency to lust for things and because of lust they are willing to alter it for their taste, needs or ego. If a person truly loves an animal they love it for what it is, in its true natural condition.
If the surgery is done completely and correctly the odds remain low of any regeneration. However it is still an IF and I for one am not willing to bet my or my families life on an IF is it worth yours?
There is an argument that there is no evidence of a venomoid biting someone and envenomation occurring. That is incorrect! There is actually 3 very well recorded case's of it occurring.
There are as of this date 3 confirmed envenomations from supposed venomoids snakes. 1 in Miami Florida. 1 in Liverpool and 1 in Germany.
Why is there not more? Simple, Under the medical coding system a snake bite is broken down as follows
Bite
animal NEC E906.5
other specified (except arthropod) E906.3
venomous NEC E905.9
arthropod (nonvenomous) NEC E906.4
venomous - see Sting
black widow spider E905.1
cat E906.3
centipede E905.4
cobra E905.0
copperhead snake E905.0
coral snake E905.0
dog E906.0
fer de lance E905.0
gila monster E905.0
human being
accidental E928.3
assault E968.7
insect (nonvenomous) E906.4
venomous - see Sting
krait E905.0
late effect of - see Late effect
lizard E906.2
venomous E905.0
mamba E905.0
marine animal
nonvenomous E906.3
snake E906.2
venomous E905.6
snake E905.0
millipede E906.4
venomous E905.4
moray eel E906.3
rat E906.1
rattlesnake E905.0
rodent, except rat E906.3
serpent - see Bite, snake
shark E906.3
snake (venomous) E905.0
nonvenomous E906.2
sea E905.0
spider E905.1
nonvenomous E906.4
tarantula (venomous) E905.1
venomous NEC E905.9
by specific animal - see category E905
viper E905.0
water moccasin E905.0
You will see there is no CODE FOR VENOMOID so it has to be called venomous. and lets face it if it injects venom it is hot, no matter what the person selling it may have told you.
Unless the bite receives media attention and it is told to them it was a venomoid "which by the way is not a true word" then it is considered venomous. With the growing market for these altered reptiles it is only a matter of time before we start hearing more and more bite accounts.
Of course the proponents for these altered animals will claim bad surgery is the case. Which will contradict there previous argument that its impossible to regenerate.
Well, to me the simple fact is no surgery and no risk would have prevented it. A venomoid owner would not treat a hot the same as his new pet cornsnake thus he would not have had the hot to begin with. As you can easily gather if it injects venom its hot despite any argument to the contrary. Doctors are not willing to lie or make a false report as a rule as then they themselves can be sued and loose their license or potentially end up in jail.
Some say there are many vets that will perform this surgery. I challenge them to give the vets name! Below is the oath all Vets take. You can see by reading it that such a surgery would be in a direct violation of a vets sworn oath.
Veterinarian's Oath
Being admitted to the profession of veterinary medicine, I solemnly swear to use my scientific knowledge and skills for the benefit of society through the protection of animal health, the relief of animal suffering, the conservation of livestock resources, the promotion of public health and the advancement of medical knowledge.
I will practice my profession conscientiously, with dignity and in keeping with the principles of veterinary medical ethics.
I accept as a lifelong obligation the continual improvement of my professional knowledge and competence.
Many of the vets I have spoke to point out that in fact even if they could discount their Oath the risk of a potential bite and potential ramification in lawsuits and risk of loosing their license is not worth the few hundred dollars they will gain.
As to the legalities of Surgery and the requirements of said surgery up to an including Post Operative and pre operative care and medical records requirements
Surgery
AWA regulations require that survival surgeries be performed using aseptic
techniques and that major operative procedures on nonrodents be performed only in dedicated surgical facilities. Nonsurvival surgeries require neither aseptic techniques nor dedicated facilities if the subjects are not anesthetized long enough to show evidence of infection. Research facilities doing surgical demonstrations while traveling must use aseptic techniques and dedicated surgical facilities. Motel meeting rooms and auditoriums do not qualify as dedicated surgical facilities.
Nonsurvival surgeries not performed aseptically or in a dedicated facility must at least be performed in a clean area, free of clutter, and using acceptable veterinary sanitation practices analogous to those used in a standard examination/ treatment room. Personnel present in the area must observe reasonable cleanliness practices for both themselves and the animals. Eating, drinking, or smoking are not acceptable in surgery areas, and locations used for food handling purposes do not qualify as acceptable areas for performing surgeries.
Pre-and Post-Procedural Care
AC 3.3
pre-through post-procedural care and relief of pain and distress. The specific
details must be approved by the attending veterinarian or his/ her designee.
However, the attending veterinarian retains the authority to change post-operative care as necessary to ensure the comfort of the animal. The
withholding of pain and/ or distress relieving care must be scientifically justified in writing and approved by the IACUC. The appropriate use of drugs to relieve pain and/ or distress must be specified in the animal activity proposal to avoid possible delays due to investigator concerns that a treatment regimen may interfere with the study. Furthermore, the specified drugs for relief of pain and/ or distress must be readily available for use as described in the proposal.
While an animal is under post-surgical care, the ownership of the animal is not to change. If the animal is taken to an off-site location, such as a farm, for post-operative care, that location should be identified as a site of the research facility. An animal is not to be taken to an off-site location before it fully recovers from anesthesia unless justified in the animal activity proposal. Appropriate post-operative records must be maintained in accordance with professionally accepted veterinary procedures regardless of the location of the animal.
Program of Veterinary Care
Facilities which do not have a full-time attending veterinarian must have a
written Program of Veterinary Care (PVC). This Program must consist of a
properly completed APHIS Form 7002 or an equivalent format providing all of the information required by the APHIS form. The attending veterinarian must visit the facility on a regular basis, i. e., often enough to provide adequate oversight of the facility's care and use of animals but no less than annually. Records of visits by the attending veterinarian must be kept to include dates of the visits and comments or recommendations of the attending veterinarian or other veterinarians.
The PVC must be reviewed and updated whenever necessary (e. g., as a new species of animal or a new attending veterinarian is obtained, or the preventive medical program changes). It must be initialed and dated by both the attending veterinarian and the facility representative whenever it is changed or reviewed without change. The preventive medical program described in the PVC is expected to be in accordance with common good veterinary practices (e. g., appropriate vaccinations, diagnostic testing). It should include zoonotic disease prevention measures and, if necessary, special dietary prescriptions.
Health Records 3
AC 3.4
Health records are meant to convey necessary information to all people
involved in an animal's care. Every facility is expected to have a system of
health records sufficiently comprehensive to demonstrate the delivery of
adequate health care. For those facilities that employ one or more full-time
veterinarians, it is expected there will be an established health records system consistent with professional standards that meets and probably exceeds, the minimum requirements set forth in this policy. For facilities that do not employ a full-time veterinarian, it is suggested the health records system be explained as part of the written PVC, to ensure involvement of the attending veterinarian in developing the system. For all facilities, health records must be current, legible, and include, at a minimum, the following information:
! Identity of the animal.
! Descriptions of any illness, injury, distress, and/ or behavioral
abnormalities and the resolution of any noted problem.
! Dates, details, and results (if appropriate) of all medically-related
observations, examinations, tests, and other such
procedures.
! Dates and other details of all treatments, including the name,
dose, route, frequency, and duration of treatment with drugs or
other medications. ( A "check-off" system to record when
treatment is given each day may be beneficial.)
! Treatment plans should include a diagnosis and prognosis, when
appropriate. They must also detail the type, frequency, and
duration of any treatment and the criteria and/ or schedule for
re-evaluation( s) by the attending veterinarian. In addition, it
must include the attending veterinarian's recommendation
concerning activity level or restrictions of the animal.
Examples of procedures which should be adequately documented in health
records include, but are not limited to, vaccinations, fecal examinations,
radiographs, surgeries, and necropsies. Routine husbandry and preventive
medical procedures (e. g., vaccinations and dewormings) performed on a group of animals may be recorded on herd-health-type records. However, individual treatment of an animal must be on an entry specific to that animal. As long as all required information is readily available, records may be kept in any format convenient to the licensee/ registrant (e. g., on cage cards for rodents).
Health records may be held by the licensee/ registrant (including, but not limited to, the investigators at research facilities) or the attending veterinarian or divided between both (if appropriately cross-referenced), but it is the responsibility of the licensee/ registrant to ensure that all components of the 4 records are readily available and that the record as a whole meets the requirements listed above.
An animal's health records must be held for at least 1 year after its disposition or death. (Note: Some records may need to be held longer to comply with other applicable laws or policies.) When an animal is transferred to another party or location, a copy of the animal's health record must be transferred with the animal. The transferred record should contain the animal's individual medical history, information on any chronic or ongoing health problems, and information on the most current preventive medical procedures (for example, the most recent vaccinations and dewormings). For traveling exhibitors, information on any chronic or ongoing health problems and information on the most current preventive medical procedures must accompany any traveling animals, but the individual medical history records may be maintained at the home site.
As you can see by the AWA' s laws and regulations for surgery and care "ONLY" a licensed Vet may perform such a surgery. Therefore any person performing such a surgery without being a vet is in violation of Federal Laws. If you combine this fact with the fact that the proper narcotics are controled substances and prescription narcotics you can easily see that ANYONE other then a vet performing such surgery would either be doing it without proper medications which would inflict undue pain and sufferring and potentially death on the animal. Or they are doing so with illegally obtained narcotics. Either way they are breaking the laws. Are you willing to help and aid in the illegal activities of these people by purchasing the animals they produce and continueing the demand for their supply?
Yet there are still people who just have to have a venomous reptile altered to suit there needs. Why is this some may ask? Simple human ego and lust for something. If your thinking of purchasing one of these animals you should look deep inside yourself and ask yourself why?
I have had the pleasure of meeting and knowing of many venomous keepers. From a Middle aged Woman with bad knees and thick glass's to a 93 year old man to a 17 year old kid. All these people keep their hots HOT. They are no better than you nor do they have some overbearing ego. What they do have and put fourth is the time and money to learn how to properly handle safely these animals.
A venomoid animal can cost from $400.00 on up! Yet the same species in its natural form will cost a fraction of that cost. Instead of contributing to a practice that can and does cause pain and suffering and potentially was created illegally would it not be better to spend the extra money in gas and handling equipment and learn from a skilled handler so you can keep that animal you truly love in tact and in its natural beauty majesty and health?
If you can not or do not feel you can provide yourself with the safety needed to handle a venomous reptile yet still love to look at them why not visit a zoo or search the web for their pictures?
Now that that's out of thew way is it me or is it interesting that this persons first post on their first day is to a venomous forum on a subject that would obviously insight members?
Oh yes, an IP check would be very interesting...retard.
